08-10-2018 10:42 PM
Hope someone can help me - thanks.
Company field on contact record
I believe I understand the difference between a contact record with an (UNLINKED) company - i.e. one which is not linked to an overall organisation.
What is puzzling me is that I have inadvertently created dozens of duplicate records which are being picked up as duplicates because there is no name in the contact field. For instance, I have put entities such as trade exhibitions, shops and services in the Company Field without any contact name. I intend to use secondary contacts for people attached to the company, as I find the company module clunky and have no real need of it.
My records will be mainly people not attached to companies, or companies with no contact name.
How does one get around this? As I see it I have 2 options to avoid dupes.
(1) Put the company name (e.g. a department store) in the CONTACT field rather than the company field
(2) Or duplicate the company name in the contact field.
Visually, I'm reluctant to fill the contact name unnecessarily with the same data as the company field.
What might be the best solution here?
Many thanks for any help - appreciated.
08-11-2018 11:42 AM
In what little I know of Act! - the center of the information is the contact, everything else revolves around the contact record (Companies and Groups are only to organize the information) the rest (Calendar of Activities and Business Opportunities have as center of information the CONTACT.
There are other CRM solutions whose the center of information is the Account (In these CRM solutions you can create the account or company without the need to create a contact)
The way I use Act! is ... first I create the company record with as much information as possible and from this company I create the contact
If you need to create the company without contacts, then create the new record in the companies entity but without creating a contact from the company
In the case of contacts that do not work in a company, I create the contact simply
...Best regards and Good luck
08-11-2018 04:17 PM
Many thanks for your very careful explanation and diagrams. Generous of you.
I understand about setting up a name just using companies, but that's a real fiddle to use the company module, Also, I like to work from the contact screen. If I have a record that is only, say, the name of a shop or my local garage without any particular contact. I want to be able to search for it from the main contacts screen. I really don't want to use companies.
So I think all I can do is go ahead with my records without a contact,, but a company name - and turn off duplicate checking for new records.
That does mean if I do a search of all contacts I get a heap of blank lines at the top of the screen, but I can live with that.
My only issue is going ot be when I run a dupe check from TOOLS. I will get a lot of dupes and will just have to run my eye down the screen to find the ones which are genuine dupes. Or just try always to be very careful!
Again - thank you for the clarification.
08-13-2018 12:34 AM - edited 08-13-2018 12:35 AM
I completely understand where you are coming from and I tend to do the same thing myself.
A couple of things I can suggest.
1. Change the Duplicate Checking fields in Tools > Preferences > Admin > Duplicate Checking to something like Company and Postcode to stop the annoying duplicate warnings.
2. I also put the name of the Key Contact in the Contact field and the rest as secondary contacts.
3. I would also recommend the Addon from Gilles at www.exponenciel.com Default Lookup Field which will allow you to change the default field n the Quick Lookup area from the Contact to the Company field.
I do use Company records sparingly but only if there's a major benefit in doing so. Generally, managing company records is a real pain, especially for organisations with multiple users. It's not so much setting them up that's the issue as Juan explains above, it's managing changes when users change or territories are realigned where the short-comings of Act! become apparent. Unfortunately, there's never been any desire to make this part of the program more usable and whilst we are on our API-fest I suspect there never will be.